Verification and Validation Sample Clauses

Verification and Validation. Seller shall ensure that its manufacturing processes and equipment are appropriately verified and validated as required by Legal Requirements. Verification, validation, equipment calibration, and equipment validation data shall be documented and made available to Hillrom upon request.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Verification and Validation. Verification is done for both models. Verification is to test whether the model does what we expect it does. The verification is divided into two parts: the extreme value tests and compares the output of the simulations with exact calculations. In Appendix H the verification of the Min-max model is given. In Appendix I, the verification of the Lead-time model is provided. For the extreme value test, extreme values are assigned to the input parameters; respec- tively to the turn-around stock, the number of servers, the minimum level or threshold, the lead-times or total requirements and the repair times. For example the turn-around stock is set equal to 0 and 100 while the values of the other input parameters remain unchanged. For every case one run is simulated and it is checked whether the output of the simulations was as expected. The results clearly show that the model works as expected. For the com- parison with the exact calculation for one parameter setting, different KPIs are calculated using formulas. For this parameter setting 20 simulations are run. The values of the exact calculation are compared with the values of the 20 simulation runs using a statistical t-test. In the appendices the methods are explained in more detail. During the validation we tested whether the outcome of the model correspond to the outcome in the real situation. To test whether this is the case the Min-max As-Is situation is simulated. As this situation is most similar to the current situation at NedTrain. The average fill rate obtained from the simulation is equal to 0.84 (independent from the uti- lization rate), See Appendix L and Table L.1. The fill rate of the model should be equal to the network service rate at NedTrain, because they measure the same. The network service rate of the 99 parts used in this simulation, in the year 2011 is equal to 0.9681. The differences between the fill rate of the simulation and the network service rate is quite large. As discussed in the subsection 3.3.3 the assumption of independent lead-times might be responsible for this large difference. But due to lack of the right data it was not possible to determine whether the lead-times are dependent from their priority. Therefore this large difference is taken for granted.
Sample 1Sample 2
Verification and Validation. ‌ When dealing with complex autonomic systems one needs to face the problem of the development and of the validation of the models used for planning and for execution control. Indeed, while it is important for a large class of autonomic systems to integrate sensing and acting functionalities, controlled by deliberation mechanism (e.g. planning and execution control), the actual integration very often follows simple rules of thumb, which do not rely on any clear verification and validation approach. Nevertheless, the autonomy requirement of these systems keeps rising, and they need a more flexi- ble approach to handle the used resources. These systems are deployed for increasingly complex tasks; and it becomes more and more important to prove that they are safe, dependable, and correct. This is particularly true for rovers used in expensive and distant missions, such as Mars rovers [BdSIY13], that need to avoid equipment damage and minimize resource usage, but also for robots that have to interact regularly and in close contact with humans or other robots. Consequently, we think that it is becoming very common to require software integrators and developers to provide guarantees and formal proofs as certification. Formal verification is an attractive alternative to traditional methods of testing and simulation that can be used to provide correctness guarantees. By formal verification we mean not just the traditional notion of program verification, where the correctness of code is at question. We more broadly mean design verification, where an abstract model of a system is checked for desired behavioural properties. Finding a bug in a design is more cost-effective than finding the manifestation of the design flow in the code. The ASCENS approach relies on the integration of two state-of-the-art technologies for verification and validation, namely D-Finder [BBNS09, BGL+11] and SBIP [BBD+12]. They are both based on BIP, a formal framework for building heterogeneous and complex component-based systems [BBS06]. Notably, thanks to the formal operational semantics of the SCEL language outlined in the previous section, BIP models can be obtained from static SCEL descriptions (i.e. involving only bounded creation/deletion of components and processes) by exploring a set of transformations rules. For further details about the application of verification and validation techniques and correspond- ing tools the reader is referred to the ASCENS Joint Deliverable JD3.1. [Be...
Sample 1
Verification and Validation. The Collateral Account Bank shall not be obliged to make any payment or otherwise to act on any Instruction notified to it under this Agreement if it is unable: (a) to verify any signature pursuant to any request or Instruction against the specimen signature provided for the relevant Authorised Representative xxxxxxxxx; and (b) to validate the authenticity of the request by telephoning a Call-back Contact who has not executed the relevant request or Instruction as an Authorised Representative of the Issuer.
Sample 1
Verification and Validation. ‌ There is no general approach that can be applied for model verifications and in particular validation because what is appropriate depends fundamentally on the purpose of the model [9, 11]. The ePolicy model will be assessed against three broad types of tests: Utility: Does the model meet the requirements of the project? Face [10] or conceptual [8, 12] validity: Are the model design and results consistent with theory and are they plausible? • Verification [5]: Is the design appropriately translated into model code? A verification test against historical data, which is sometimes also suggested for ABM, is impractical, as the setting (Conto Energia) in which the simulated entities act has changed a lot in recent years. This results in changes of the conditions for the simulator as well as changes in the adoption settings for the photovoltaic consideration. To give one example, in the previous energy account, households could install photovoltaic on the ground (i.e. on far larger areas then roofs). This is not possible under the current energy account any more, which is why in the simulator only roof sizes are included. This change however significantly changes the monetary considerations associated with photovoltaic and thus is likely impact the simulation results. That is why for the ePolich social simulator only the current (fifth) energy account was considered. For this energy account no sufficient number of past data is available to test the simulator on.
Sample 1
Verification and Validation. Verifying or validating the corrective and preventive action to ensure that such action is effective and does not adversely affect the finished device;
Sample 1
Verification and Validation. Such changes shall be verified, or where appropriate validated according to ISO 13485 7.5 (Validation of Processes for Production and Service Provision), before implementation and these activities shall be documented. Such changes shall be approved by appropriate personnel and in accordance with the document change procedures set forth in ISO 13485 7.3 (Control of Design and Development Changes).
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Verification and Validation. In COPE deliverable D4.4. it was proposed that the COPE technology should be evaluated from two distinguishable aspects of human factors evaluation i.
Sample 1
Verification and Validation 
Sample 1

Related to Verification and Validation

  • Inspection and Verification The Secured Parties and such persons as the Secured Parties may reasonably designate shall have the right to inspect the Collateral, all records related thereto (and to make extracts and copies from such records) and the premises upon which any of the Collateral is located, to discuss the Grantor’s affairs with the officers of the Grantor and its independent accountants and to verify under reasonable procedures the validity, amount, quality, quantity, value, condition and status of, or any other matter relating to, the Collateral, including, in the case of collateral in the possession of any third Person, by contacting any account debtor or third Person possessing such Collateral for the purpose of making such a verification. Out-of-pocket expenses in connection with any inspections by representatives of the Secured Parties shall be (a) the obligations of the Grantor with respect to any inspection after the Secured Parties’ demand payment of the Notes or (b) the obligation of the Secured Parties in any other case.

  • Inspection and Testing Each Constructing Entity shall cause inspection and testing of the Interconnection Facilities that it constructs in accordance with the provisions of this section. The Construction Parties acknowledge and agree that inspection and testing of facilities may be undertaken as facilities are completed and need not await completion of all of the facilities that a Constructing Entity is building.

  • Inspection and Tests 3.8.1 The Procuring entity or its representative shall have the right to inspect and/or to test the goods to confirm their conformity to the Contract specifications. The Procuring entity shall notify the tenderer in writing in a timely manner, of the identity of any representatives retained for these purposes. 3.8.2 The inspections and tests may be conducted in the premises of the tenderer or its subcontractor(s), at point of delivery, and/or at the Goods’ final destination If conducted on the premises of the tenderer or its subcontractor(s), all reasonable facilities and assistance, including access to drawings and production data, shall be furnished to the inspectors at no charge to the Procuring entity. 3.8.3 Should any inspected or tested goods fail to conform to the Specifications, the Procuring entity may reject the equipment, and the tenderer shall either replace the rejected equipment or make alterations necessary to make specification requirements free of costs to the Procuring entity. 3.8.4 The Procuring entity’s right to inspect, test and where necessary, reject the goods after the Goods’ arrival shall in no way be limited or waived by reason of the equipment having previously been inspected, tested and passed by the Procuring entity or its representative prior to the equipment delivery. 3.8.5 Nothing in paragraph 3.8 shall in any way release the tenderer from any warranty or other obligations under this Contract.

  • Search, Enquiry, Investigation, Examination And Verification a. The Property is sold on an “as is where is basis” subject to all the necessary inspection, search (including but not limited to the status of title), enquiry (including but not limited to the terms of consent to transfer and/or assignment and outstanding charges), investigation, examination and verification of which the Purchaser is already advised to conduct prior to the auction and which the Purchaser warrants to the Assignee has been conducted by the Purchaser’s independent legal advisors at the time of execution of the Memorandum. b. The intending bidder or the Purchaser is responsible at own costs and expenses to make and shall be deemed to have carried out own search, enquiry, investigation, examination and verification on all liabilities and encumbrances affecting the Property, the title particulars as well as the accuracy and correctness of the particulars and information provided. c. The Purchaser shall be deemed to purchase the Property in all respects subject thereto and shall also be deemed to have full knowledge of the state and condition of the Property regardless of whether or not the said search, enquiry, investigation, examination and verification have been conducted. d. The Purchaser shall be deemed to have read, understood and accepted these Conditions of Sale prior to the auction and to have knowledge of all matters which would have been disclosed thereby and the Purchaser expressly warrants to the Assignee that the Purchaser has sought independent legal advice on all matters pertaining to this sale and has been advised by his/her/its independent legal advisor of the effect of all the Conditions of Sale. e. Neither the Assignee nor the Auctioneer shall be required or bound to inform the Purchaser of any such matters whether known to them or not and the Purchaser shall raise no enquiry, requisition or objection thereon or thereto.

  • INSPECTION AND REJECTION 8.1 Purchaser shall have the right to inspect and test Products at any time prior to shipment, and within a reasonable time after delivery to the Purchaser’s Destination. Products not inspected within a reasonable time after delivery shall be deemed accepted by Purchaser. The payment for Products shall in no way impair the right of Purchaser to reject nonconforming Products, or to avail itself of any other remedies to which it may be entitled. 8.2 If any of the Products are found at any time to be defective in material or workmanship, damaged, or otherwise not in conformity with the requirements of this Agreement or any applicable Purchase Order, as its exclusive remedy, Purchaser may at its option and at Vendor’s sole cost and expense, elect either to (i) return any damaged, non-conforming or defective Products to Vendor for correction or replacement, or (ii) require Vendor to inspect the Products and remove or replace damaged, non-conforming or defective Products with conforming Products. If Purchaser elects option (ii) in the preceding sentence and Vendor fails promptly to make the necessary inspection, removal and replacement, Purchaser, at its option, may inspect the Products and Vendor shall bear the cost thereof. Payment by Purchaser of any invoice shall not constitute acceptance of the Products covered by such invoice, and acceptance by Purchaser shall not relieve Vendor of its warranties or other obligations under this Agreement. 8.3 The provisions of this Article shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.

  • MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION The goal of this task is to report the benefits resulting from this project by performing measurement and verification (M&V) of fossil fuel consumption and associated GHG reduction. • Enter into agreement with M&V subcontractor per Task 1.9 • Coordinate site visits with the M&V subcontractor at the demonstration site(s) • Develop M&V protocol for pre-installation measurements (and calculations): o Electric, natural gas and/or other fossil fuel consumption and GHG emissions (use appropriate emissions factor from Attachment 8 of the grant solicitation) of the equipment/process/system(s)/sub-system(s) that are to be upgraded and/or replaced and/or modified. o Ensure installation of sub-metering equipment and data loggers for pre/post data analysis. • Prepare and provide a detailed M&V Plan for each project demonstration site to include but not be limited to: o A description of the monitoring equipment and instrumentation which will be used. o A description of the key input parameters and output metrics which will be measured. o A description of the M&V protocol and analysis methods to be employed. o A description of the independent, third-party M&V services to be employed, if applicable. • Perform three months (or shorter period as approved in writing by the CAM) of pre- installation measurements (and calculations) based on the M&V protocol for pre- installation. • Prepare and provide a Pre-Installation M&V Findings Report for the demonstration site that includes M&V protocol, pre-install measurements (and calculations), analysis, and results performed in this task. • Develop M&V protocol for post-installation measurements (and calculations) of: o Electric, natural gas and/or other fossil fuel consumption and GHG emissions (use appropriate emissions factor from Attachment 8 of the grant solicitation) of the equipment/process/system(s)/sub-system(s) that will be upgraded and/or replaced and/or modified • Perform 12 months or two seasons, for seasonal facilities, (or shorter period as approved in writing by the CAM) of post-installation measurements based on M&V protocol for post-installation. • Provide a summary of post-installation M&V progress in Progress Report(s) (see subtask 1.5) which shall include but not be limited to:

  • Verifications If Partner acquires Red Hat Products and/or Services directly from Red Hat, during the Term and for at least two (2) years thereafter, Partner will keep and maintain commercially reasonable written records regarding Partner’s use and distribution of the Red Hat Products and Services and business activities related to the Program(s) ("Records"). Red Hat may, at its own expense, verify the Records to determine Partner’s compliance with this Agreement. This verification may take the form of requests for information, documents or records (to which Partner will respond promptly), on-site visits (for which Partner shall grant Red Hat the requisite access), or both. The Parties will act reasonably and cooperate with each other in respect of such verifications. Any on-site visit will occur during regular business hours and will not interfere unreasonably with Partner’s business. For an on-site visit, Red Hat will give Partner at least thirty (30) day’s prior written notice.

  • EVALUATION AND MONITORING The ORGANIZATION agrees to maintain books, records and other documents and evidence, and to use accounting procedures and practices that sufficiently and properly support the complete performance of and the full compliance with this Agreement. The ORGANIZATION will retain these supporting books, records, documents and other materials for at least three (3) calendar years following the year in which the Agreement expires. The COUNTY and/or the State Auditor and any of their representatives shall have full and complete access to these books, records and other documents and evidence retained by the ORGANIZATION respecting all matters covered in and under this Agreement, and shall have the right to examine such during normal business hours as often as the COUNTY and/or the State Auditor may deem necessary. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, and records of matters covered by this Agreement. These access and examination rights shall last for three calendar years following the year in which the Agreement expires. The COUNTY intends without guarantee for its agents to use reasonable security procedures and protections to assure that related records and documents provided by the ORGANIZATION are not erroneously disclosed to third parties. The COUNTY will, however, disclose or make this material available to those authorized by/in the above paragraph or permitted under the provisions of Chapter 42.56 RCW without notice to the ORGANIZATION. The ORGANIZATION shall cooperate with and freely participate in any other monitoring or evaluation activities pertinent to this Agreement that the COUNTY finds needing to be conducted.

  • Audit, Inspection and Visitation The Adviser shall make available to the Trust during regular business hours all records and other data created and maintained pursuant to the foregoing provisions of this Agreement for reasonable audit and inspection by the Trust or any regulatory agency having authority over the Trust.

  • Verification of Coverage Prior to beginning any work under this Agreement, Consultant shall furnish City with certificates of insurance and with original endorsements effecting coverage required herein. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!